Empirical Economics

, Volume 43, Issue 2, pp 537–563 | Cite as

Detecting discrimination in the hiring process: evidence from an Internet-based search channel

  • Stefan Eriksson
  • Jonas Lagerström


This article uses data from an Internet-based CV database to study how job searchers’ ethnicity, employment status, age, and gender affect how often they are contacted by firms. Since we know which types of information that are available to the recruiting firms, we can handle some of the problems with unobserved heterogeneity better than many existing discrimination studies. We find that searchers who have non-Nordic names, are unemployed or old get significantly fewer firm contacts. Moreover, this matters for the hiring outcome: searchers who get more contacts have a higher probability of getting hired.


Job search Unobserved heterogeneity Discrimination Ethnicity Employment status Age 

JEL Classification

J64 J71 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Åslund O, Nordström Skans O (2011) Do anonymous job application procedures level the playing field? Ind Lab Rel Rev (forthcoming)Google Scholar
  2. Belzil C (1996) Relative efficiencies and comparative advantages in job search. J Lab Econ 14: 154–173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bertrand M, Mullainathan S (2004) Are Emily and Greg more employable than Lakisha and Jamal? A field experiment on labor market discrimination. Am Econ Rev 94: 991–1013CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Blau DM, Robins PK (1990) Job search outcomes for the employed and unemployed. J Polit Econ 98: 637–655CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Carlsson M (2011) Does hiring discrimination cause gender segregation in the swedish labor market. Fem Econ 17(3): 71–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Carlsson M, Rooth DO (2007) An experimental study of sex segregation in the Swedish labor market – Is discrimination the explanation. Labour Econ 14: 716–729CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Edin PA, Lagerström J (2006) Blind dates: quasi-experimental evidence on discrimination. Working paper 2006:4. IFAU, UppsalaGoogle Scholar
  8. Eriksson S, Lagerström J (2006) Competition between employed and unemployed job applicants: Swedish evidence. Scand J Econ 108: 373–396CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Goldin C, Rouse C (2000) Orchestrating impartiality: the impact of “blind” auditions on female musicians. Am Econ Rev 90: 715–741CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Heckman J (1998) Detecting discrimination. J Econ Perspect 12: 101–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Lahey JN (2008) Age, women, and hiring—an experimental study. J Hum Resour 43: 30–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Lahey JN, Beasley RA (2009) Computerizing audit studies. J Econ Behav Organ 70: 508–514CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Neumark D with the assistance of Bank RJ, van Nort KD (1996) Sex discrimination in restaurant hiring: an audit study. Q J Econ 111:915–941Google Scholar
  14. Oreopoulos P (2009) Why do skilled immigrants struggle in the labor market? A field experiment with six thousand résumés. University of British Columbia, VancouverCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Riach PA, Rich J (1997) Testing for sexual discrimination in the labor market. Aust Econ Pap 26: 165–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Riach PA, Rich J (2002) Field experiments of discrimination in the market place. Econ J 112: F480–F518CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Weichselbaumer D (2004) Is it sex or personality? The impact of sex-stereotypes on discrimination in applicant selection. East Econ J 30: 159–186Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of EconomicsUppsala UniversityUppsalaSweden
  2. 2.School of Business and EconomicsÅbo Akademi UniversityÅboFinland

Personalised recommendations